Some people believe that air travel should be restricted because it causes serious pollution and will use up the world's resources.
Globalisation is a catch-all term which has resulted in the rapid growth of international traveling between countries around the globe. Accompanied with this growing trend, there are some environment-related issues which have prompted controversies of whether cutting back on flights or not. Despite air travel's negative impact on environment, I disagree with this opinion.
There are several reasons why the air travel is considered to be responsible for the issue of pollution in fast-paced world. The primary reason to support the idea is that aircrafts have led to an increase in carbon footprint released into the atmosphere annually, which contributes towards other severe issues such as greenhouse effect and global warming. Even though aviation accounts for less than 3 percent of total carbon emissions from the burning of fossil fuels, its impact is predicted to rise double or even triple in the next 50 years due to the soaring number of flights. Also, the noise pollution arising from aviation has a detrimental impact on human's behaviour, health and daily lives. Residents who live closely airports' areas are likely to have difficulties in normal activities such as sleep, conversation or disrupts. More importantly, if this problem lasts in a long-term period, the hearing loss is unavoidable to a handful group of people.
Although traveling by air is likely to cause problems, it is not to say that air travel should be restricted in the progress of globalisation. Alternatively, air travel can be operated in a much more eco-friendly manner to mitigate its impact on environment. A breakthrough in the use of greener fuels like solar panels, biofuel and hydrogen, could save the world from the degradation of the environment by aircrafts running on kerosene. Meanwhile, the model of aircrafts having more capacity would offer more passengers, thus, there would be a considerable decline in the number of flight.
According to the above analysis, I believe putting a restriction on traveling by air is not an efficient way in terms of its commercial benefits to the development. Nations should discuss together and find possible solution to tackle or at least reduce its impact on environment.
Do you agree or disagree?
Globalisation is a catch-all term which has resulted in the rapid growth of international traveling between countries around the globe. Accompanied with this growing trend, there are some environment-related issues which have prompted controversies of whether cutting back on flights or not. Despite air travel's negative impact on environment, I disagree with this opinion.
There are several reasons why the air travel is considered to be responsible for the issue of pollution in fast-paced world. The primary reason to support the idea is that aircrafts have led to an increase in carbon footprint released into the atmosphere annually, which contributes towards other severe issues such as greenhouse effect and global warming. Even though aviation accounts for less than 3 percent of total carbon emissions from the burning of fossil fuels, its impact is predicted to rise double or even triple in the next 50 years due to the soaring number of flights. Also, the noise pollution arising from aviation has a detrimental impact on human's behaviour, health and daily lives. Residents who live closely airports' areas are likely to have difficulties in normal activities such as sleep, conversation or disrupts. More importantly, if this problem lasts in a long-term period, the hearing loss is unavoidable to a handful group of people.
Although traveling by air is likely to cause problems, it is not to say that air travel should be restricted in the progress of globalisation. Alternatively, air travel can be operated in a much more eco-friendly manner to mitigate its impact on environment. A breakthrough in the use of greener fuels like solar panels, biofuel and hydrogen, could save the world from the degradation of the environment by aircrafts running on kerosene. Meanwhile, the model of aircrafts having more capacity would offer more passengers, thus, there would be a considerable decline in the number of flight.
According to the above analysis, I believe putting a restriction on traveling by air is not an efficient way in terms of its commercial benefits to the development. Nations should discuss together and find possible solution to tackle or at least reduce its impact on environment.
